The Celts big three are superstars, our are not but sometimes play like it

We can say this about our "Big Three." Jackson and Davis are consistant as hell, giving you great minutes every game. Ellis, when hot, can be one of the better players in the league. If he can get that shot going down consistantly, it will make every basher against him because of his size, eat their words right there on the spot.

The difference between the Warriors is that you could subtract both "Big 3's" from the equation and the Warriors would stomp Boston out. Take away Garnett, Pierce, and Allen... and then take away Baron, Jackson, and Ellis... and we still have Harrington, Biedrins, and Barnes, not to mention youngsters like Wright and O'Bryant.

Yeah, Mullin built a playoff team with the huge trade last year. We are contenders w/o mortgaging our future. You could argue that the Celtics are much better than the Warriors, but a playoff team is just a playoff, until the win the championship. Look at Dallas version 2006-07. If the Celtics do not win a title in the next three years, then all the money they are shelling out is pointless.

32 wrote:The difference between the Warriors is that you could subtract both "Big 3's" from the equation and the Warriors would stomp Boston out. Take away Garnett, Pierce, and Allen... and then take away Baron, Jackson, and Ellis... and we still have Harrington, Biedrins, and Barnes, not to mention youngsters like Wright and O'Bryant.

That's right but that just shows that the Celts big three are much better than the ones mentioned for us. It is a team game and the Warriors are just more deep and allround. In a playoff series, I'd pick the Warriors but the Celts seem to have it figured out with the team they have

And hey, the Warriors Big 3 are scoring a bit more than the Celtics Big 3.

Baron Davis - 23.3
Monta Ellis - 16.4
Stephen Jackson - 21.4

Kevin Garnett - 19.4
Paul Pierce - 20.1
Ray Allen - 21.1

Add that up, the Warriors Big 3, or better yet Little 3 are combining up to 61.1 while the Celtics Big 3 combines up to 60.6 a game.

They're similar in scoring yet those three are worth nearly over 75% of the Celtics salary. Not comparing the players, just saying if you could get that scoring for the price of around 30$ mil against around 55$ mil, wouldn't you be happy?

xbaywarrior wrote:And hey, the Warriors Big 3 are scoring a bit more than the Celtics Big 3.

Baron Davis - 23.3Monta Ellis - 16.4Stephen Jackson - 21.4

Kevin Garnett - 19.4Paul Pierce - 20.1Ray Allen - 21.1

Add that up, the Warriors Big 3, or better yet Little 3 are combining up to 61.1 while the Celtics Big 3 combines up to 60.6 a game.

They're similar in scoring yet those three are worth nearly over 75% of the Celtics salary. Not comparing the players, just saying if you could get that scoring for the price of around 30$ mil against around 55$ mil, wouldn't you be happy?

Yes I would...unless I was an owner that had been putting such a bad product out for the last few years that I needed to put out major "Star Power" to sell tickets

xbaywarrior wrote:And hey, the Warriors Big 3 are scoring a bit more than the Celtics Big 3.

Xbay, man, I started this whole thing.... you copied my idea!

sfsfsfgiants wrote:I just want to bring up one point about the Celtics' big three: For those who are on the Celtics' bandwagon: the Warriors big three (Monta, Jackson, and Davis) average more points than the Celtics (Allen, Pierce, Garnett).

xbaywarrior wrote:And hey, the Warriors Big 3 are scoring a bit more than the Celtics Big 3.

Xbay, man, I started this whole thing.... you copied my idea!

sfsfsfgiants wrote:I just want to bring up one point about the Celtics' big three: For those who are on the Celtics' bandwagon: the Warriors big three (Monta, Jackson, and Davis) average more points than the Celtics (Allen, Pierce, Garnett).

Ah yes, but I provided the evidence. I'll give you the nod for the topic, but I proved it. So therefore, I win.

xbaywarrior wrote:And hey, the Warriors Big 3 are scoring a bit more than the Celtics Big 3.

Xbay, man, I started this whole thing.... you copied my idea!

sfsfsfgiants wrote:I just want to bring up one point about the Celtics' big three: For those who are on the Celtics' bandwagon: the Warriors big three (Monta, Jackson, and Davis) average more points than the Celtics (Allen, Pierce, Garnett).

Ah yes, but I provided the evidence. I'll give you the nod for the topic, but I proved it. So therefore, I win.

I saw the exact same article you did. Nobody cares about the stats, they care about concepts. Therefore, I win.

xbaywarrior wrote:And hey, the Warriors Big 3 are scoring a bit more than the Celtics Big 3.

Xbay, man, I started this whole thing.... you copied my idea!

sfsfsfgiants wrote:I just want to bring up one point about the Celtics' big three: For those who are on the Celtics' bandwagon: the Warriors big three (Monta, Jackson, and Davis) average more points than the Celtics (Allen, Pierce, Garnett).

Ah yes, but I provided the evidence. I'll give you the nod for the topic, but I proved it. So therefore, I win.

I saw the exact same article you did. Nobody cares about the stats, they care about concepts. Therefore, I win.

Ah yes, but when you're outscoring an team of three being paid more and a higher rep, stats do come in. Thus, I am the winner.

xbaywarrior wrote:And hey, the Warriors Big 3 are scoring a bit more than the Celtics Big 3.

Xbay, man, I started this whole thing.... you copied my idea!

sfsfsfgiants wrote:I just want to bring up one point about the Celtics' big three: For those who are on the Celtics' bandwagon: the Warriors big three (Monta, Jackson, and Davis) average more points than the Celtics (Allen, Pierce, Garnett).

Ah yes, but I provided the evidence. I'll give you the nod for the topic, but I proved it. So therefore, I win.

I saw the exact same article you did. Nobody cares about the stats, they care about concepts. Therefore, I win.

Ah yes, but when you're outscoring an team of three being paid more and a higher rep, stats do come in. Thus, I am the winner.

But you wouldnt have even said anything had I not resurected this thread to say the stat in the first place. So.......... I win.

xbaywarrior wrote:And hey, the Warriors Big 3 are scoring a bit more than the Celtics Big 3.

Xbay, man, I started this whole thing.... you copied my idea!

sfsfsfgiants wrote:I just want to bring up one point about the Celtics' big three: For those who are on the Celtics' bandwagon: the Warriors big three (Monta, Jackson, and Davis) average more points than the Celtics (Allen, Pierce, Garnett).

Ah yes, but I provided the evidence. I'll give you the nod for the topic, but I proved it. So therefore, I win.

I saw the exact same article you did. Nobody cares about the stats, they care about concepts. Therefore, I win.

Ah yes, but when you're outscoring an team of three being paid more and a higher rep, stats do come in. Thus, I am the winner.

But you wouldnt have even said anything had I not resurected this thread to say the stat in the first place. So.......... I win.

Whatever, end of discussion. You're starting to sound like my girlfriend.